Just Posted: Nikon D800 hands-on preview

We've had some time with a pre-production D800 and have prepared a detailed in-depth preview. Nikon's latest DSLR boasts core technology borrowed from the top-end D4, married with a 36.3MP CMOS sensor that comfortably eclipses the rest of the DSLR market in resolution terms. As well as first impressions of handling and operation, and an in-depth look at the D800's specifications we've also dived a little deeper into the D800E, the D800's sister model, which cancels-out the effect of its anti-aliasing filter.

Comments

OK, so I am not about to question Nikon's focus on pixel count (though it does seem a bit of a contradiction). My complaint (and it is a persistent one if anyone at Nikon is listening) is the lack of attention to connectivity and built in features. Is a built-in GPS REALLY that much to ask from the D700? How about a fully functional bluetooth protocol? Is the two-picture HDR in the D800 REALLY a giant leap forward? Why refuse to give more bracketing options? IMHO the D700 is a perfect platform the build from. Images are spectacular and perfectly fine for any application that I might consider, and I konw many others feel the same. Why not fix a design and work to perfect the FUNCTION of that design. Digital cameras are getting worse than cars these days. I need 36 mp like I need 500 horsepower, meaning not at all, I don't need ISO to infinity. I need a D700 with built in GPS and connectivity so I can actually use the damn thing on adventure shoots.

I have long wished that Nikon abandon the Sony Sensor line and having studied the sensor technology world wide for the last two years; I would prefer that Nikon turn to the Fuji Line of Sensors...hand down they are leading the way...even Canon admits that it is Fuji that have to fear.

Sony makes excellent sensors which shows in many top performing cameras. Nikon makes excellent cameras and lenses. I see it as a great combination. People really need to stop using Sony as a synonym for bad sensors. It's completely untrue and Nikon is wise to utilize Sony sensors for some of their cameras and do their own R&D for others.

Canon tries to do all on their own and see how they have fallen behind in terms of image quality on their consumer level cameras.

I weep. I've not yet had time to search out D800 produced high ISO u=images but the few comments I'v seen noted "noi starting to show at ISO 800. That sounds consistent with what you'd expect from a Sony 36 MP sensor, alas. Using Sony sensors is fine, as long as you can make them perfprm, but it's sad to see Nikon pursuing Sony camera performance as well.

I wonder about this too, and I'd like to see some images shot higher than ISO 100. Say what you want about the D700 and 12mp but it's just amazingly noise-free. I also have a 5DII, which gets noisy shadows at ISO 500.

I see a lot of comments about downsizing to make high megapixel cameras yield similar results to a lower res camera. But if that is what you have to do, why not just stick with the lower res in the first place? You are already there for crisakes.

The reason to get a higher resolution sensor and then _somtimes_ downsize to control noise in high ISO shots is that you also have the option of hiigher resolution when low ISO can be used and noise is not a problem. 36MP is clearly aimed mainly at low ISO shooting, and there is plenty of that done by professionals and dedicated amateurs. We are not all PJ's!

The amount of complaining here is just hilarious. People realize that this is not the camera they need or want and who is at fault? Of course Nikon for making a camera that does not fit their imaginary need. Or maybe you just can't afford $3k plus another $4k for a decent set of FX lenses? Sorry, but that is not Nikon's fault that you can't afford it. Good luck finding the imaginary dream camera that is only made for you and costs $1200 and comes with lenses that are all under $500 and all have VR and are super sharp at f/1.2.

Seriously, if you don't need 36 mp, you are welcome to use a D700 which is still a very good camera. You can't afford full frame? Fine, buy the excellent D7000 and take amazing photos with it. Stop this complaining about a camera that you don't need or can't afford.

Well said octane...for those who gripe at something u can't afford buy a chinese duplicate and get an orgasmic happiness out of it...what say? these products are for people who want the best in this business and not for a point and shoot purpose!

right right, we just been simple persons and been told by nikon that iso is more important then high pixel count and so we been hoping for a D4 sensor.Now we need some time to understand the new direction and i got already permission from my wife to buy me one : )

Yeah, right. Problem is, I can afford one and have ordered the one without the AA filter, but I do have concerns about moire, noise and speed for HDR. Why not wait? Because Nikon is always backordered.

There’s now one complaining about the price. The thing is there was a D3 D700 combo with high iso performance. So everyone expected a D4 D800 combo with the same philosophy, and later a D4X with a higher MP count. Al of a sudden there is a D800 with 36Mp, It’s a total different route!A lot of Nikon buyers praise Nikon to stay with 12Mp an high ISO performance. You hear it every ware, even here “well processed 12Mp beat other camera’s” , see review D3, D700 conclusion. An now everybody is raving about 36Mp ????????So i stay with my D700, Nikon lost a D800 buyer

When did Nikon or any camera maker say that high ISO is always the top priority? Both Nikon and Canon have been catering to both high speed and high resolution with their high end options for a long time. Only in forums do I read people single-mindedly declaring that one or other of ISO or MP is the sole priority for improving sensor performance.

And you're on drugs. Nikon whoops Canon in body tech - tho they need to do a bit of adding/revamping of the lens lineup. Exactly what matches (on the Canon side) the D300/300s or D7000? The 60D? Hardly. The 7D? Not on your life? And what about the Nikon CLS? Sorry, I shot Canon from the 20D through the 50D (owned all between, too) and Nikon has the lead in bodies. Period. Of course, if you're just being a troll or fanboy, carry on!

I like the specs of this new camera. It's got lots of intelligent choices. I like the fact that it is a reasonable small and not so heavy camera with fullframe and more pixels than you'll probably ever need. In combination with bigger telelenses you can attach the extra grip for better balance. For a city walk with a standard zoom or 35mm prime you have the smaller camera that doesn't attract so much attention. Nice for street photography. It's smart that you can select lots of other pixel sizes and therefore spare up your hard disk space. 4 fps should be enough for a shooter with an eye for the decisive moment. 50-12800 iso should cover 99,99% of all photographic momentsyes, for me it's a complete camera.I might even buy one...

+1 this also has an incredible range of usable lenses, using primes natively and with a more than decent crop for DX zooms, which are generally lighter.

I have to admit I'm not so thrilled by the relatively low frame rate, which slows it down for action shooting or HDR work, nor the huge file sizes, but very camera has it's compromises and I think the D800's are ones I could live with.

So Guys Nikon has put a 36MP FF sensor in the D800 and just a 16MP in the D4 and which model is aimed at the pros? Hmmm.....Smells of marketing hype to me for the prosumer/enthusiast market. Looking at the replies here it looks like a good picture has yet to be taken because we've never had a 36MP sensor. Keep your money in your pockets and buy good glass as that's what really counts.

I beg to differ. I hear this "glass is all that matters" sentiment parrotted all too often, and in 2012 it just isn't true anymore. There are plenty of very important considerations in regards to a camera body now, and depending upon your situation it is just as important a purchase as any lens. This tired old rhetoric needs to die. Cameras, lenses, and whatever additional tools a photographer needs to get the job done share equal importance.

@ Visualiza...you make a good argument. Each component is important. But for the time being for the average photog glass is probably the most important component...unless you are planning on making poster size prints 16 mega pixels is more than enough for most applications. It also appears that the noise handling of the 16 mega pixel sensor might be superior so I would agree with philo123 that my money would be better spent on the lenses. Also bear in mind that only the best of the best NIKON glass can even resolve enough resolution to take advantage of the sensor on the D800.

I completely disagree with that. With a sensor with this many pixels the quality of the lenses you put on it is more important than ever or you will be wasting the money you spend on the body. If the image that is projected on the sensor is crap it doesn't matter how good your camera body is. The result is very very poor. We will see a lot of "my D800 is soft" posts in the coming months.

Conrad, good points on all counts; however, it isn't my intent to dismiss the importance of good glass at all; I just believe that it is a bit silly to dismiss the importance of a body.

@aus_pic_hunter, you seem to forget that a body is more than a sensor. Ergonomics, size & weight, buffer, speed, AF, viewfinder, and several other factors contribute to taking photos as well. I do agree that bodies are the more disposable of the two in the long run; however the same consideration should be given to bodies when determining what sort of work you will be doing.

We need to move on from this old platitude of "lenses are 95%, cameras are 5%." If you ask me, the break-down should be 100% consideration towards bodies and 100% consideration towards lenses. The two are not mutually exclusive and we are no longer in the days where a body was essentially a film holder. There are a whole host of things that go into a body and it's high time we start appreciating and respecting that.

Just few things: D4 can take 11-12 frames p. sec as the d800 can produce 3-4. D4 has wider ISO range and goes all the way up to 256.000, that's three stops higer than D800. The d4 shutter is build to last 400.000 cycles vs the 200.000 for the D800. In short: if you are a photojurnalist of one or another kind the D4 is for you. If you do studio work or landskape the D800 is maybe the right camera for you. D800 is definitely the I'm going after.

The real drawback here is computer handling. I am admittedly a Canon shooter with a 5D mark ii. I am conditioned to shoot as small a picture as I can, simply because the size of a full res shot takes up so much disk space. I think that Nikon might have overshot those of us who use the camera either semi professional or as travel tools. 22MP is already almost too much as far as I can tell. But if I shot Portrait or Wedding photography I might be persuaded otherwise I suppose. I have actually shot a couple of weddings with the mark ii and must say, even at 24x30 inches the photos were stunning...maybe in the future brides will be asking for life size....HMMM.

I have seen the picture examples of Nikon Life. Very good quality.If there are lenses with a quality of 36 MP, why not. It seems a marvellouscamera. I am the Tuscan-Photo-Scout and I prefer landscapes.Nikon D800 can be a wonderful instrument for lightpainting in the nature.I think the future will show us all the positive aspects of this camera.The D800 has a great potential. Such a nice instrument into the right handcan create great pictures. I'am waiting for more examples.

To be brutally honest, the D800 sample images are good... but definitely not that good that i would drool over them. Why has Nikon deliberately not posted a single high sensitivity (ISO 1600 plus) sample image up for scrutiny...?! Considering the price of the body + appropriate lens in order to achieve the maximum potential out of that 36 MP sensor... the investment seems to high & the dividends too mediocre to appeal to mass market consumers...

I can't see any discernible differences in image quality between the D800 and D7000 at iso 100 ... The images are okay... pretty much what you would expect from a full frame sensor... but at the same time, nothing out of the ordinary or breathtaking... Personally i hate Nikon's matrix metering system on the D7000 ... it constantly overexposes... i prefer the old system incorporated on the D5100 instead... much more reliable...

Once Nikon gets moving, their competitors better watch out. Nikon's sample pics are amazing, particularly the ones from the “E” version. I wonder what lenses will support such high resolution sensors? Looks like this camera is not for available darkness fans.

Why not save your money and wait until the 50 megapixel DXXX or the D-Whatever hits the market if you need that sort of pixel count. In a few years time you'll be drooling and creaming over the 50 megapixel whatever and saying my D800 just isn't good enough. Your fetish for new kit and more power will of course be fuelled by the press and the marketing machine.

Could it be taxes? Here in the states, gasoline prices vary state by state because of state taxes. It could be simply greed or it could be a luxury or VAT tax that increases the price. Just a suggestion, I don't know why.

Henry,That's right. Either the pixel size limits resolution or the optics limits resolution. When the optics is perfect then making the pixels smaller than the Airy disk is a waste of effort, money, and a great springboard for marketing hype.

For $3000, you get what is basically a 5Dmk2 and a 7D in one camera. Only it is better than either the 5Dmk2 or 7D. I can get nearly the same resolution with pro AF using crop mode. I can get more resolution and all the full framey goodness of the 5Dmk2. All in one camera. And crop or FF lenses work on this camera so it is an easy upgrade if you are a crop shooter.

Even if Canon comes out with a similar camera, their EF-S lens design prevents similar usability.

People need to look at this camera for what it is and what it isn't. Forget about what you need or want because there is no such thing as a end all be all camera. ISO guy tell MP guy he don't need 36mp, MP guy tell ISO guy he don't need 12800 iso. What a dead end conversation that is.

What clear to me is that Nikon does not want the D800 to be the baby D4 the way the D700 is to the D3. If that was what you were looking for in the D800 then it's safe to say that Nikon did not make this camera for you. This is meant to be the direct competitor to the upcoming 5D Mark III. It's Nikon way of saying "ok, your 5d mark II been outselling our D700 on premises that you have more resolution with video mode and a slight hit on high iso and AF performance. Well this time around we going to see video and modest iso, and we'll raise you 36.3mp with our D4 AF and Metering."

The ball is now on your court Canon. Remember, competition is good for us consumer.

I own a D70 and have been patiently waiting for this round of Nikon releases and would like to throw out a question to the masses here. I shoot a wide variety of pictures. Everything from my kids indoor and outdoor activities, vacation pictures, portraits and the once in a blue moon wedding. I would estimate that I am pushing around ten thousand shots a year. I made an investment in a 200mm 2.8 Nikon lens a couple of years ago for evening football and baseball games and have had reasonable success stopping the action with my D70 and its limited ISO range. My question is what would you recommend as an upgrade? The D4 is out due to the price tag. So I am somewhere between a D7000 or the D800. Your advice is appreciated.

The sensor result of the D7000 is proven to be a great success, The D800's sensor is new and unproven yet. Also 4fps(D800) vs. 6fps(D7000) plus larger file, longer buffering time between shot (D800), beside consider you going need a lot of low light+high ISO situation and sporting event, unless you doing a lot of cropping and BIG print, I think you could save your money with the D7000 and invest the rest of your money in lenses. just my humble 2 cents.

The D7000 is a great camera and has very good low light performance (3200 is still very good and it starts to fall-off and be grainy @4000+). I currently shoot with one and have compared it side by side with the D700. I can’t say enough for good glass, which is 90% of the battle. The only big complaints that I have on the D7000 would be the small buffer and the low light AF isn’t great. I’m anxious to see how it stacks up against the D800, but comparing the two is like apples and bananas. I’m looking to go FF, so I’m very interested in the D800 (Landscape & Architectural Photos); but the D7000 is a GREAT aps-c, is a great camera for $1k and the 16mp is enough for most any application. Yes - FF is better, but might not be the best choice for everyone; unless they have $3k for a body and $2k laying around for each lens. If you’re shooting with a D70, you’ll be blown away by the performance of a D7000. The D800 - I have no experience in besides reading reviews, like everyone else.

Please take in mind that Nikon isn't the same company as it was many years ago. Lenses & camera's are being manufactured in low-cost areas, to maximize their profits. If you look at some lenses in the DX-range, they are very disappointing in quality (both manufacturing Q, design and IQ). Also camera's are subject of this 'cheap, cheaper, cheapest' struggle. I find that some Nikon's are - carefully expressed - a bit overpriced to what they really are.

Last week I got to use a Hasselblad H4D-60 ... 180 meg TIFF files. Now everything else looks coarse. The detail in some test landscape shots, on my 27" Thunderbolt screen is simply stunning! But it isn't the right camera for my sports/action photography. So equipment does matter. I'm never going to be happy shooting landscapes with my Canon's.

Really, try winning a photo competition, shooting a wedding, shooting stock, making and selling 24+ inch fine art prints or shooting a commercial advertising contract using an 8 megapixel P&S from several years ago. Just tell them its the photographer that matters and not the camera. I'm sure they will understand when the technical quality of your images is well below the current standards. The fact is there is an expected technical IQ level that you have to meet in order to even get a seat at the table or be taken seriously as a photographer. Having great content and composition wont matter if the technical IQ of your images doesn't meet that threshold. It may not be fair, it may not be admitted or talked about by photographers, but it is the truth.

Yeah, when a low light shot had a lot of purple artifacts my wife called it artistic. So I would correct your observation albeit in the same spirit: "A great photo is not a function of the camera or the person behind the lens but that of the woman who likes the photo."

I don't have that (p&s) camera any more and she still likes my pictures.

The most inspirational Photographer/Artist i ever came across up to this point in my life was when I was travelling in India couple years ago I met this street photographer whose only tool is a old nikon FM2 with a 50mm 1.8 E lens plus a beat up Nikon Coolpix 4MP digital, the images which this gentleman produced blew me away and I will never forget the imagery and his creative sense of subject matter. Really, we need a 36MP camera to produce good photo? even if you are a Pro, really you need a 36MP to create your master piece? Come on, people, you really Needed it or wanted it is completely different thing...

This camera's aimed at pro-sumers and fine-artists. There are fine-art photographers that sell 20x24 prints at $1200+ easily and when they command prices like that equipment such as this is practically required.

Yes, really need it, really, I mean it, really, I need the 36Mp.You should first think of all the different kinds of photography there is and what we can do with a 36Mp camera could not and can't be done with that FM camera. I have it's sister, the FE2.My main photography is macro and to get a good DoF, which is the major concern every time, I can now move away from the subject to get a better DoF and then crop the image. BIG difference.

Don't always think that just because they didn't have the same possibility back when they used plates that it means that they where satisfied with what they could do. You can rest assure that they had a lot of situations they wished they could master better.

Jmmg - I do agree with you on D800 do not = Good photographer. BUT~ if your clients demand high-end equipments for your productions then 4mp + FM2 are not going to get you any business at all. Some people do think D800 = good photographer or 5DII = best photographer others are garbage.

That is just brain wash talk. You've been fooled by big corporation which controls the politicians. I live without car, 30 year old TV, don't buy new cloth until I really need it because my old one has worn out (which means about every 5 years), never throw away food, etc. I live quite well and healthy. I don't live to own things, I live to experience the wonders of the world.Things don't make you happy. If you think they do then you need help.

I want to make as large prints as I can, really I would like an ALPA with an 80Mp Phase One back and some Schneider lenses, but I am a few bob short of the $60 000+ price tag. However this camera represents an inroad to my vision of creating staggeringly good quality LARGE prints! Everything has its place, buy a different camera for a different application that you have perhaps...?

What kinds of client those are? When I show up in a meeting with my clients and shown them my portfolio and if they like what I did previously, they don't care what tool i use as long as the final products satisfy their needs. If the kind of client only concentrate what TOOLS you use before the result, I will ask myself am I selling my soul instead of my art?

Good for you. Why are you reading threads about a D800 then? Just looking at all the stupid brainwashed idiots?

Capitalism requires consumerism which is based on want not need. I don't condone it, it's a fact. No-one needs an iPhone or a TV, but Apple and Samsung employ thousands of people. I have had the same car for over 10 years but that's my choice.

Well, actually the reason I bought BMW is because I have owned many other brands of automobile before, Honda, Toyota, Subaru, Volvo, VW, Ford and GM, but none of them drive and feel better than the car I have now, I guess for me, the feeling of the driving sensation is a sensation that I do not know how to explain, but again thats doesn't mean I became a better driver because of the choice of automobile...anyway off topic a lot....

If you want really clear prints at really large sizes, you need either medium / large format or as many MPix as you can get along with matching glass. You don't need 18 or 22 or 36 mp to produce good 8x10's, even with cropping. You DO need the horsepower to get results at large size prints, or to produce normal prints from very tight crops.

Is it possible to adjust the JPEG size (not quality) when writing RAW+JPEG?

Lets say that I have a SD WiFi card and a Regular CF card, I want the RAWs sent to the CF card and the JPEGs sent to the SD WiFi card and from there to an iPhone/iPad, but the large 36MP files will kill the iPhone yet it will be able to handle 3072 x 2040 files.

At last - its here!! Great. I have a D3X and lugging that thing around the world to get hi-res images does in my back and baggage allowance. By comparison this is a lightweight. I will be placing my order.Well done Nikon(But you could have made it look a bit prettier)

Honestly, they're interested in whatever Sony has to offer. Nikon is smart. Now that there's enough processing power to deal with 36mp, they release the D800. If they had a 36mp camera 3 years ago, it would have horrible noise and very slow performance.

There are rumors that the D3200 will have 24.2mp, which isn't surprising because Sony uses the 24mp sensor for the NEX-7 and A77.

For me, the video functions are nice-to-have. I do fine art and landscape work using a Mamiya 645 and p25 back. The back and camera are both wildly out of date and I can't afford to upgrade them, so welcome D800 (I use a D700 for routine shooting). I am hoping the e-version will come even remotely close to the quality of medium format ... and the D800 is going to get a whole lot more expensive when you upgrade lenses to match the resolution and sharpness of the sensor.

I shoot 4x5 film frequently and do optical enlargements with a Mamiya 7. The D800E is the first camera to get me excited about digital. I'm not selling enough prints to justify a medium format, digital system but this camera's at a price point that makes sense for me.

The only question I have is where are the wide angle lenses, Nikon? Looks like I'm going to have to turn to Zeiss for good, prime WAs.

Ok so Nikon now have:1. DX 5000 etc for beginners2. D7000 for more advanced beginners3. D800 for the wedding etc photogs4. D4 for the sports photogsWhat about the wildlife photographers?I think there are quite a few out there.From my viewpoint what is needed in a suitable camera are:1. DX format for reach2. High Iso/low noise for high shutter speeds with telephoto lenses - tripods are not always suitable for mobile 'hunting' but are useful to the larger predators as toothpicks.3. Min AF at f5.6 for telephoto plus TCs (non-pros cannot afford the exotic telephoto lenses).4. Improved/better DR

Did you miss the fact the D800 has DX mode? At 15.3MP? Ticks *all* your boxes. So basically you buy a D800 at 36MP and get a D7000 (with better noise performance, improved AF, etc.) for free. Can't beat that deal.

A free D7000? I love this analysis... this will make purchasing (i.e. justifying this purchase) much, much easier. ;-)

Actually, it does seem to me that there is a hole in the lineup right in the space that the D300s occupies. I'm not sure the D7000 is quite what the D300s is - mainly in terms of the build and ergonomics. I wonder if Nikon will continue with a camera at the top of the pro-sumer DX line.

I also noticed the automatic, 16MP crop when using DX lenses. I said good bye to my 5D classic a couple months ago in preparation for the next gen of full frames. Now I could say good bye to my Nex-5N and it's extremely mild bayer filter, too? Hello D800E!

jwalker,It's rumoured that the D800 sensor is just an enlarged D7000 sensor. Hence I doubt that the noise performance will be any better than the later.Yes, the improved low light AF of the D800 is an advantage but still the high ISO noise performance remains to be seen. D3S is my high ISO benchmark or minimum of D700.

Klay,That's more or less what I'm saying. The 'buy an FX camera to get a pro (or semi pro) body DX' doesn't make economical sense.Nikon now has:DX - FF low light, low pixel count.DXXX - FF & DX high pixel countDXXXX - High MP DXThat leaves 'DXX' vacant and I doubt Nikon have forgotten about this sequence. Would be nice if it was a low noise DX type. Difficult to know Nikon's coding strategy.As you mention, D7000 is not a D300 replacement IRO a 'more pro' build.

I'm not saying there won't be a D400 (probably later on this year), but how does getting both a 36MP full-frame and a 16MP DX for $3k not "make economical sense"? If I were in the market right now, the D800 would certainly be on my short list ;)

Look at it this way, an extra $1000 or so for features I don't really need?Iff the D800 low noise is comparable with the D700 (or better still, the D3S) then the economics would be good with getting (not so free) FX as a 'freebie'.I have nothing aginst the D800, quite the opposite as the images look fairly good - especially the video.Just wishing Nikon would get it's 'rear into gear' with a good, lightweigth (in comparison to the D700/D800) DX camera.

People on here just like complaining and will never be happy. That said I was expecting the same 24mp sensor form the D3x to be on this camera and that is more than I will ever need. 36mp is more than I'll use so I won't bother with it until the 16mp D800s comes out!

Thanks for the article, and thanks Nikon for extending our photographic toolset!

I've been using a Hasselblad with a 50MP back for about 3 years so far, so I'm looking forward to lightning my load on a number of future hikes.

I'm a little surprised by some of the comments so far. I'm used to big images and have not had a problem with my workflow. Honestly it hasn't been a problem, three or four minutes at the worst waiting for thumnail generation.

I'm sure that i have a number of lenses that will work fine with the D800e, it's not as if every lens Nikon Has ever made has to work with every camera they have ever made. I'm happy that there is a camera that can extract that level of detail from the lenses that can provide it. As for diffraction limits, it's just another detail of physics that al good photographers have to add in the mix when deciding how to best capture a subject.

Some people are interested in taking highly detailed images of stationary or well lit subjects, where low ISO speeds are usable, and noise levels will be fine. Nikon has other products for fast action/low light needs.

I offer a $100 video removal service. Send me the camera and I will take a black sharpie and color out the video mode on the dial. When you get your camera back, that horrible video mode will never get in your way again!

I am sure that Nikon acquires feedback from users of their cameras and puts this feedback to use. The focus of the D4 and the D800 is, to a degree, on different types of photography. And thus also possibly, but not necessarily, on different types of uses and users. I enjoy, using bellows which makes the D800 my camera of choice. The weight and the size suit my bellows. And live view, 36.3 MP, memory card types etc. are most welcome also. For me, the D800 definitely has my attention. To each his own.

36 megapixels! I think that is ridiculous! Where will it stop! 50! 75! 100! Why? If you're a professional and need to print to A2 or A1 or A0, then yes! I rarely print even to A3 and when I do my trusty Olympus E1 does the job. This camera would be a waste of time, money, resources and features for me. I suppose all the geeky gadget boys will be creaming themselves over this. When the EOS D60 came out, the 6MP, one a professional photo magazine said in review "you don't need more than six megapixels to print an A3 magazine spread". And then when the Kodak 14 MP DSLR came out they said "14 megapixels is very close to the maximum resolution of the best lenses". Let me save you loads of money by saying if you don't print or print to A4 or A3 then this camera is a waste of money, it's a niche camera for niche people. Unless you're a specialist - YOU DON'T NEED 36 MEGAPIXELS.

In terms of IQ, I guess you value DR and ISO performance more over resolution. I'm on the same boat but one thing this enables is the removal of the AA filter. With this amount of resolution, moire is minimized without using a low pass optical filter. Start reducing image size from the original file, moire will hardly be found.

The world doesn't revolve around you, did you ever think about that? This will set away large format cameras for some landscape photographers. I've had the E-1. Please don't put it in the same class as this. Maybe a point and shoot will do for you!

Using automobile metaphor is probably the best example to describe the twisted phenomenon of many Manufactures "Tailor" their products to satisfy the North American every needed to go Big or go home sentiment. Most of the car like BMW, Mercedes or even Fiat or VW over Asia or Europe had smaller and more effeicent engine then there N. American cousin. Seem to be everything come over this side of the ocence always HAVE to be more "POWERRRRRRRR" Biggerrrrrrrrrrrr" so N.American will like it, I can;t stop visualizing A TYPICAL REDNECK with a NIKON D800 around his/her neck sitting in his/her FORD F150 Raptor with couple 12 gauges and yelling Yahoo look at how BIG and How BAD Ass my truck, my guns and my Camera. Yahoooooo!

Jmmg: a Prius can hit 100mi/hr, a Prius is not a power car or big. Likewise a D800 is neither big nor flashy, but it will serve the needs well for people who require the megapixels and yes even some who do not. If camera buyer is looking for a status symbol they turn to the Leica red dot not Nikon.

Gevork Moesesi, Retatosk: I think you should you read my comment again and again and again so you understand it. The D800 is a small niche camera. The vast majority of users don't need this sort of kit. I'm a former professional and have been published in national UK press so I think I know something about the business. Why not save your money and wait until the 50 megapixel DXXX or the D-Whatever hits the market if you need that sort of pixel count. In a few years time you'll be drooling over the 50 megapixel whatever and saying my D800 just isn't good enough.

It’s strange and I hope I do not understand the philosophy of Nikon.We had D700 for the enthusiast low cost full frame capable of high iso a good all-rounder emphasis to low light and sport , a cheap D3 for the enthusiast! We have a follow up D3S for the professional sport photographer and low light, we have a D3X for the ones who need more pixels. Mostly professionals.Now there is a D4, the real new D3S with a little bit more pixels same low noise via newer sensor technology and or software 16Mp, it’s right in the ballpark. Al at once there is a D800 with 36MP? I expected a D800 with the sensor from the D4, video and so on, a camera that make really noise free pictures indoors in the living room or in the sport arena of my kids! Now, 36 MP, my computer never can process. I had expected D4X with this amount of pixels. Maybe they build a D600 with the sensor of the D4 and a new D400 with the sensor of the D7000.For me it’s obvious the D700 stay the best Nikon

the fact that you see the d700 as a "cheap d3" is part of the problem for Nikon... that was why ui bought the d700 as well. now, the choice is clear, d800=hi mp, lower spec... d4 = low mp, high spec. as a pro, pick your tool.

Great write-up. Was wondering about the AF settings and performance while shooting video -- are AF options are available for both stills and video, and how well does it work in practice? Coming from D90 I am used to MF and selecting proper apertures, but on occasion an AF option would come in handy.

I think D90 vs D800 video would be like upgrading from Circus Circus to the Bellagio.

Latest in-depth reviews

The Hasselblad X1D-50c is a mirrorless medium format camera from one of the most famous camera brands of the 20th century. Following a series of feature-enhancing firmware updates we've been able to complete our review.

The LG G7 ThinQ is a flagship device with a dual camera that departs from the norm: rather than the usual tele/wide combo, it offers wide and super-wide angle lenses. While it doesn't produce class-leading image quality, it's a solid option if you favor wide-angle shooting.

The Fujifilm X-T100 is the company's least expensive X-series camera to include an electronic viewfinder. It shares most of its guts with the entry-level X-A5, including its hybrid AF system and 24MP sensor and, unfortunately, its 4K/15p video mode.

Whether you're hitting the beach in the Northern Hemisphere or the ski slopes in the Southern, a rugged compact camera makes a great companion. In this buying guide we've taken a look at seven current models and chosen our favorites.

What's the best camera for a parent? The best cameras for shooting kids and family must have fast autofocus, good low-light image quality and great video. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for parents, and recommended the best.

What's the best camera for shooting landscapes? High resolution, weather-sealed bodies and wide dynamic range are all important. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting landscapes, and recommended the best.

What’s the best camera costing over $2000? The best high-end camera costing more than $2000 should have plenty of resolution, exceptional build quality, good 4K video capture and top-notch autofocus for advanced and professional users. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing over $2000 and recommended the best.

Alex and Kathryn are photographers, friends and Tokyo residents who love exploring Japan's hidden cultural treasures. They each brought a Canon EOS M50 on a recent trip starting in bustling Tokyo and ending in the peaceful riverside town of Gujo Hachiman.

Canon's latest 70-200mm F4L comes with a five stops of image stabilization, a new coat of paint and impressive sharpness. We've been shooting with our copy for several weeks now - see how it stacks up in our sample gallery.

Special 4K and 6K Photo modes may be one of the most under-appreciated features on recent cameras. In this week's episode, Chris and Jordan take a closer look at these modes and explain why – and when – you'll be glad to have them on your camera.

Ten years ago this month Panasonic and Olympus announced a new concept called Micro Four Thirds. We're now on the brink of full-frame mirrorless from at least one major player, so perhaps it's a good time to take a look back at where it all started – and how far we've come.

At a high-profile launch event in New York, Samsung took the wraps off its next Note device. The Galaxy Note 9 borrows the S9+'s 12MP dual-aperture dual-cam, with OIS in both cameras and an emphasis on AI-enhanced shooting modes.

One of the most keenly-awaited lenses for a while, the new Pentax D FA* 50mm F1.4 is finally here, and we've been using it for a few days. In this article, we're updating our initial impressions on the basis of our recent shooting with the K-1 II.

This week we take a look at one of the most unusual optics we've seen for quite a while. The Laowa 24mm F14 Macro Probe lens may look like something out of a science fiction movie, but as Chris and Jordan discover, it opens the door to some pretty cool photo opportunities.

GoPro has revealed its Q2 2018 financial results, boasting a massive 40% quarter-over-quarter revenue increase to $283 million and net loss of $32 million, which the company says is a 51% sequential improvement.